Efficacy and safety of generic cefoperazone/sulbactam versus branded cefoperazone/sulbactam in the treatment of bacterial infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

This study aim to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of generic cefoperazone/sulbactam compared to the branded cefoperazone/sulbactam (Sulperazon) in treating bacterial infections through a meta-analysis. Searches were conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP databases, and Clinical Trials database, resulting in the inclusion of 11 studies comprising 7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 retrospective cohort studies (RCSs). Meta-analysis of the RCTs indicated no statistical differences in clinical success rates, clinical cure rates, microbiological eradication rates, and incidence of adverse reactions between the generic cefoperazone/sulbactam and the branded version. Findings from the RCSs aligned with those from the RCTs, demonstrating that generic versions of cefoperazone/sulbactam are equivalent in efficacy and safety to their branded counterparts in treating bacterial infections.

Keywords:

• Cefoperazone/sulbactam
• generic drug
• branded drug
• bacterial infection
• systematic review
• meta-analysis

Acknowledgment

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author contributions

R.W. came up with the idea, conducted the literature search, data analysis, chart drawing and manuscript writing. Y.L. and W.Y. performed the statistical analysis and revised the manuscript’s language. X.W. and P.C. participated in the literature search and screening. W.C. and R.W. assessed the quality of the literature. All authors made contributions to the article and approved the submitted version.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

No unpublished data are available.